mmm yeah

You do realize, that with the WTO case filed by EADS/Airbus, if SpaceX actually wins this, it'd likely spell the end of Boeing, right?

And not to pile on...but:
http://www.space.com/news/sfn_051027_boeing_strike.html

More nonsense from the US Air Farce.

It seems the USAF is still the enemy of space.

Jumper's old buddy is still trying to pawn off the EELVs on Griffin.

Naturally, I disagree.

Thus my open letter to Senator Nelson:

http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/Spac ... ssage/4924

_____________________________________________________________


The Honorable Bill Nelson
Washington, D.C. Office
United States Senate
716 Senate Hart Office Building
Washington, DC 20510


Dear Senator Nelson,

Our Space Program is under assault--despite the fact that our brightest minds do in fact support current NASA Chief Administrator Mike Griffin.

Gene Kranz--well known as NASA's best flight director--calls the present exploration strategy "the best game plan...since the days of President Kennedy" (Aviation Week & Space Technology, May 12, 2008. page 23).

His writings and testimony should be support enough for the Vision of Space Exploration (VSE):

http://www.siliconvalley.com/opinion/ci ... ck_check=1
http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewsr.html?pid=27922

Clearly, he knows more about our space-needs than some Air Force Official like Robert Dickman, who seeks to force NASA Chief Administrator Mike Griffin to wear the EELV (Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle) albatross.

Both EELVs are to be produced in Alabama--a state with enough aerospace jobs what with the recent tanker debacle.

The Ares launch vehicles--especially the Ares V that is to be produced in Michoud (in Hurricane ravaged Louisiana)--will help other states economies.

An all-EELV space program would also devastate Florida--closing the 39-series pads needed for the Saturns, the shuttle, and Ares V.

With Robert Dickman's "vision," these pads will be left with the placard:

"ABANDON IN PLACE."

This cannot be allowed.


What is not commonly known is the fact that the EELV's Decatur production facility in North Alabama lies along a small tornado alley, known as Dixie Alley:

http://www.srh.noaa.gov/bmx/significant ... /index.php
http://www.srh.noaa.gov/jan/dixieAlley/img0.html

Both lines of EELV could be destroyed by a strong violent tornado such as the one that devastated Huntsville in the late 1980s with windspeeds far in excess of any hurricane.

Ares I/V allows space launch vehicle production capability to remain safely widespread.

Lastly, EELVs were never intended to launch astronauts. The Delta IV especially, has well known disposal issues and black zones. As a satellite launcher--it was never designed to fly depressed trajectories.

Scott Horowitz is not the only one who understands that EELVs are a bad deal--and that heavy lift is needed:

http://www.spacedaily.com/news/oped-05za.html

http://www.spacedaily.com/news/oped-04zc.html

http://www.spacedaily.com/pageone/space ... 01-29.html


Even supporters of unmanned spaceflight understand that Ares V is far superior than the Delta IV, as can be seen here:

http://trs-new.jpl.nasa.gov/dspace/handle/2014/40727
http://trs-new.jpl.nasa.gov/dspace/bits ... 8-03_A.pdf


Robert Dickman once worked with John Jumper, a man who was hostile to space, as discussed in this very forum--above


On page 9 of the May 12, 2008 issue of Aviation Week and Space Technology, we see evidence that Jumper's cadre of fighter pilots continue to make trouble.

To share a quote:

"USAF's behavior can be explained, in part, by the fear E-8 Capabilities, like those of some other intelligence, surveilance and reconnaissance (ISR) systems, pose a threat to fighter force structure...Congress needs to recognize the magnitude of the obstacle to effective ISR that is created by USAF's shooter oriented culture" (emphasis mine.)

No wonder that space-based radar systems--which would also benefit from the large shroud diameter offered by Ares V--have such little support. Clearly, the Air Force is still the enemy of space.

The Delta IV not only lacks the capability of Ares V--but it has also has had several problems.

While the clean hydrogen-burning RS-68 engines (that both vehicles will share) have done very well--Delta IV lacks the volume to use hydrogen effectively. It isn't big enough:

http://www.safesimplesoon.com/heavylift.htm

Also, Delta IV lacks Ares V's engine out capability. The Atlas V EELV burns kerosene--and uses Russian engines.

But Robert Dickman doesn't care about this. The Air Force has an expensive albatross in the EELVs, and they simply want to foist them upon NASA.

Dickman asked where you would get the money if you "try to accelerate Constellation?" (SPACE NEWS, May 12, 2008, page 4.)

Here is your answer.

Cut the Air Force.

Cancel KC-45, F-35 and F-22. You know that President Obama will probably ask for similar cuts anyway.

Use the remaining Air Force budgets to help pay for Ares V and larger Space Based Radars/telescopes as described here:

http://www.technologynewsdaily.com/node/7334

http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/Think ... s_999.html

Such large unmanned missions will keep the Ares V HLLV alive until such time as a later Administration revives VSE.

With a new administration, new priorities will emerge, and new moneys tied to war-fighting can be used for more peaceful purposes.

Ares V and VSE must remain as a part of a brighter, post-Iraq America.


Thank you for your time.





Publius